AliEnvy
Refugee
nbc, defining the discussion was your idea, so why don't you get it started rather than being needlessly evasive.
(Though perhaps in some cases an assertion is a better way to start...)nbcrusader said:Is any part of the body offensive? Are all bodily functions open for public viewing?
Zootlesque said:It doesn't take long for an argument to break out in FYM, does it?
nbcrusader said:My question was "is there going to be a discussion?" Far from being "evasive", I am frustrated by the persistent need for a meaningless post that does not further discussion.
nbcrusader said:How do you measure the impact? Irvine suggested that not all bodily functions are appropriate for public view. On what principle do you distinguish one function from another?
Irvine511 said:
poop and pee are not acceptable.
breast feeding is.
nbcrusader said:My question was "is there going to be a discussion?" Far from being "evasive", I am frustrated by the persistent need for a meaningless post that does not further discussion.
No one is suggesting that breast feeding is bad, or should not take place.
My question would be "how do you balance one persons' personal behavior with the impact of that behavior on those around them?"
How do you measure the impact? Irvine suggested that not all bodily functions are appropriate for public view. On what principle do you distinguish one function from another?
Muggsy said:
I don't think this thread is meaningless, just because we haven't present any discussion yet, besides if there's need of arguments I think they will rise naturally and not because someone says that this thread is useless because nobody's arguing.
I already gave my opinion about your questions,from the things I know. If you still think it is still useles, well, now is time for you to present yours
AliEnvy said:
All of what you just brought up has been peppered throughout the discussion so far...so why are you frustrated? And if this is how you would prefer to see it framed, great, thank you for clarifying.
You balance personal behaviour with impact on others with the perceived benefit of the personal behaviour as being necessary or more important than the effect it has on those exposed to it.
The distinction is nutrition versus sex versus hygiene/waste.
A babies nutrition and mother's well-being and need for social ineraction outweigh others' sexual and boldily function hangups.
WildHoneyAlways said:Here's a random story:
My friend had a baby boy last year. She didn't breast feed for long for whatever reason.
Last summer she was out to dinner with her husband and another couple. She gave her son a bottle at the table and a woman actually stopped by and said, "You know, you should be breast feeding that baby." She said she just kind of laughed and the lady walked away.
I don't think I would have been so nice.
nbcrusader said:
Along these lines, one can ask the question "is there any room for an expectation of modesty?"
AliEnvy said:Sure there is...and 99% of nursing moms ARE modest about how they handle nursing in public.
For many who find it offensive, just being in the presence of a breastfeeding mom is as much an issue than any potential peek-a-boo. Probably because the act itself parallels sexual activity.
nbcrusader said:Actually, I've seen comments in prior threads that suggested the concept of modesty in this situation was an improper burden for the nursing mother.
As for this thread, we've never been given adequate facts to determine if the objections are to the moms who are modest about nursing, or to those who are not.
Muggsy said:I think that many people gets offended by seeing the pic of the baby being feeded, because, unfortunately, women 's bodies are still seen as objects, pleasure objects, not for the women themselves, but for the men.
Angela Harlem said:Why doesn't someone from the anti camp define why it is inappropriate. And please, without comparing it to urinating in public or sex in a public place. I'm genuinely curious. What is offensive?
you are being taught where babies come from though, right?Devlin said:I think most of America is like that: not really exposed to the idea of breastfeeding as normal, and therefore uncomfortable with the idea.
deep said:
many were taught not to eat in front of others unless they were willing to share
How do you measure the impact? Irvine suggested that not all bodily functions are appropriate for public view. On what principle do you distinguish one function from another?
Perhaps there is a correlation between an individuals objection to public breast feeding and the desire to keep sexual activity a purely private matter. In that case, perhaps the "breast as a symbol of sex" concept is influential.
Along these lines, one can ask the question "is there any room for an expectation of modesty?"
Another aspect to consider is the impact of personal functions around on others. Irvine drew a bright line with the "pee pee and poo poo" analysis. Does it end there? What about personal grooming? What about simply changing clothing? Would you change from street clothes to a swim suit in a public restaurant? Why not?
And to what degree do we regulate these behaviors based on our own desires vs. a desire not to offend someone else?
Devlin said:
I think most of America is like that: not really exposed to the idea of breastfeeding as normal, and therefore uncomfortable with the idea.
Actually, I've seen comments in prior threads that suggested the concept of modesty in this situation was an improper burden for the nursing mother
OceanGirl said:
Perhaps it is time people stopped looking at breasts as "a symbol of sex" and see them for what they are. A food source for babies.
WildHoneyAlways said:She gave her son a bottle at the table and a woman actually stopped by and said, "You know, you should be breast feeding that baby."
Gibson then noticed another female sergeant and yelled, "What do you think you're looking at, sugar tits?"